LOGOI
Word Study

viññāṇaṁ — Frequency

Frequency for vinnana across indexed Pali works, with sources and receipts.

Stable lemma · Pali

viññāṇaṁ

vinnana · viññāṇa

Term ID
term:pli:vinnana
Scope
All indexed Pali works

Add this word to a research trail → The trail lives in its link; no account or cookie is needed.

Returned frequency evidence · no new statistic

Frequency profile

vinnana · Ranked corpus profile

Language
pali
Term identity
term:pli:vinnana
Exact scope
Indexed language wing
Denominator
attested_tokens
Returned rows
4
Attested works
4

4 of 4 returned rows visible.

Select two to four returned works for raw-row juxtaposition. Selection creates no metric and runs no query.

Occurrences, token denominators, normalized rates, and evidence states remain separate. A bounded ranked return is not a complete corpus table.
Returned Selected order Work Attestation state Occurrences Denominator state Attested tokens Per 10k Continue Juxtapose
1 Digha Nikaya work:pli:dn dn attested 45 available 143,998 3.13 Exact-work Concordance
2 Sutta Nipata work:pli:snp snp attested 4 available 20,164 1.98 Exact-work Concordance
3 Itivuttaka work:pli:iti iti attested 2 available 11,565 1.73 Exact-work Concordance
4 Udana work:pli:ud ud attested 3 available 20,047 1.5 Exact-work Concordance
Evidence boundary, sources, and receipt

Corpus totals and the bounded returned window remain distinct. Zero appears only for a known lemma in an exact work; unknown lemma and unavailable denominator are separate states.

  • Occurrences, denominators, per-10k rates, Range, and DP are preserved returned evidence; this workbench validates their invariants but creates no new metric.
  • Corpus totals may describe more works than the bounded returned ranked profile, while single-work and research-set totals close exactly over their returned rows.
  • Range and DP remain independent descriptive states for one exact ordered research set; raw-row juxtaposition never compares or recomputes DP.
  • Frequency evidence does not establish significance, representativeness, language-wide commonness, genre, chronology, semantic importance, causation, equivalence, proximity, order, or diachrony.
  • This projection adds no fetch, API, network, SQL, D1, provider, storage, persistence, export, or receipt authority.
Sources
source:pli:bilara-data
Receipt
unavailable · no_materialized_frequency_receipt

Source-by-source word evidence

Lexical authorities

1 lexicon records · 0 etymology pointers

Returned authorities remain separate and in source order. Logoi does not merge them into one definition, rank them, or infer agreement.

Dictionary and historical-lexicon records

Lexicon shelf

1 returned
  1. 1 Viññāṇa Viññāṇa
    PTS Pali-English Dictionary (Rhys Davids & Stede, 1921-25)
    Entry ID
    lex:pli:Viññāṇa
    Normalized headword
    vinnana
    Entry locator
    Viññāṇa
    Display posture
    not reported
    Entry body
    served
    Audit
    pending_source_review
    Review
    source_pending

    Short gloss · not a complete definition

    neuter (as special term in Buddhist metaphysics) a mental quality as a constituent of individuality, the bearer of (individual) life, life-force (as extending also over rebirths), principle of conscious life, general consciousness (as function of mind and matter), regenerative force animation, mind

    Read the entry text (display authorized)

    neuter (as special term in Buddhist metaphysics) a mental quality as a constituent of individuality, the bearer of (individual) life, life-force (as extending also over rebirths), principle of conscious life, general consciousness (as function of mind and matter), regenerative force animation, mind as transmigrant, as transforming (according to individual kamma) one individual life (after death) into the next. (See also below, c & d). In this (fundamental) application it may be characterized as the sensory and perceptive activity commonly expressed by “mind.” It is difficult to give any one word for v., because there is much difference between the old Buddhist and our modern points of view, and there is a varying use of the term in the Canon itself. In what may be a very old Sutta SN.ii.95 v. is given as a synonym of citta (q.v.) and mano (q.v.), in opposition to kāya used to mean body. This simpler unecclesiastical unscholastic popular meaning is met with in other suttas. E.g. the body (kāya) is when animated called sa-viññāṇaka (q.v. and cp. viññāṇatta). Again v. was supposed, at the body’s death, to pass over into another body ( SN.i.122 ; SN.iii.124 ) and so find a support or platform (patiṭṭhā). It was also held to be an immutable persistent substance, a view strongly condemned ( MN.i.258 ). Since, however, the persistence of v. from life to life is declared ( DN.ii.68 ; SN.iii.54 ), we must judge that it is only the immutable persistence that is condemned. V. was justly conceived more as “minding” than as “mind.” Its form is participial. For later variants of the foregoing cp. Mil.86 ; Pv-a.63 , Pv-a.219 . Ecclesiastical scholastic dogmatic considers v. under the categories of (a) khandha; (b) dhātu; (c) paṭiccasamuppāda; (d) āhāra; (e) kāya. V. as fifth of the five khandhas (q.v.) is never properly described or defined. It is an ultimate. But as a factor of animate existence it is said to be the discriminating (vijānāti) of e.g. tastes or sapid things ( SN.iii.87 ), or, again, of pleasant or painful feeling ( MN.i.292 ). It is in no wise considered as a condition, or a climax of the other incorporeal khandhās. It is just one phase among others of mental life. In mediaeval dogmatic it appears rather as the bare phenomenon of aroused attention, the other khandhās having been reduced to adjuncts or concomitants brought to pass by the arousing of v. ( Cpd. 13), and as such classed under cetasikā, the older sankhārakkhandha- as dhātu , v. occurs only in the category of the four elements with space as a sixth element, and also where dhātu is substituted for khandha ( SN.iii.10 ) In the chain of causation ( Paṭicca-samuppāda ) v. is conditioned by the saṅkhāras and is itself a necessary condition of nāma-rūpa (individuality). See e.g. SN.ii.4 , SN.ii.6 , SN.ii.8 , SN.ii.12 etc.; Vin.i.1 ; Vism.545 sq. = Vb-a.150 Vism.558 sq.; Vb-a.169 sq.; Vb-a.192 ■ At SN.ii.4 = SN.iii.61 viññāṇa (in the Paṭicca-samuppāda) is defined in a similar way to the def n under v- ṭṭhiti (see c), viz. as a quality peculiar to (& underlying) each of the 6 senses: “katamaṃ viññāṇaṃ? cha-y-ime viññāṇa-

Side-by-side source-authorized definitions

Definition comparison

1 of 1 returned entries eligible

Fewer than two returned entries carry a definition body served under explicit public-display authority, so no side-by-side comparison is available. Withheld entries above remain visible metadata and cannot be promoted. This is a rights and display state, not evidence about the word or its authorities.

Recorded authority pointers

Etymology shelf

0 returned

No etymology pointer was returned for this lemma. This reflects the holdings here, not evidence about the word’s history.

Lexicon result receipt
Not materialized · no_materialized_lexicon_receipt
Etymology result receipt
Not materialized · no_materialized_etymology_receipt

Root tokens remain claims recorded by their named authority. This collation asserts no consensus, correctness, completeness, chronology, cognacy, derivation, or semantic equivalence, and creates no composite receipt.

Deep etymology

Authority pointers

no pointers returned

Drawn from the result above, this dossier separates the current form, the authority records, and the returned pointers; it constructs no word history.

The etymology lookup completed and returned no authority pointers for this lemma. This is not evidence that the word has no history or that no authority treats it.

Etymology receipt
unavailable etymology_lookup no_materialized_etymology_receipt
Pointer-foundation limitations
  • This pointer_foundation is an in-memory projection of the already-returned Word Study etymology channel; it performs no query, provider call, database read, or model completion.
  • The current form is the resolved lexical object, not a historical stage. No ancestor, cognate, borrowing, derivation, sound change, semantic stage, chronology, or complete history is admitted.
  • Returned claim statements and root candidates remain separately attributed authority pointers. Root tokens are not promoted into forms or relationships.
  • Differing authority rows are not treated as agreement or disagreement because the returned pointer payload carries no reviewed comparison state.
  • The etymology receipt state and source identities are preserved exactly; this projection creates no receipt, source, persistence, export, or consensus authority.